Stuart Dowell

Follow for more detailed, English-language analysis of Polish politics and judicial reform.

This is now an institutional test: can a government dismantle a captured judiciary when the presidency is in opposition hands? The answer will define Poland’s legal order for years.

Żurek says his goal is to “restore the rule of law” and remove judges appointed under a system already found to breach EU standards. He has made clear this is the start, not the end, of his purge.

PiS leaders have condemned the suspensions, calling them unlawful. Former justice minister Zbigniew Ziobro accused Żurek of committing “crimes” and violating judicial independence - reversing the charge long levelled against PiS itself.

The political stakes are high: controlling these posts means controlling the daily machinery of justice. Losing them means losing influence over which cases advance, stall, or disappear entirely.

Under Poland’s constitution, President Andrzej Duda - aligned with PiS - has the power to appoint new court presidents. This means Żurek’s suspensions will almost certainly lead to a clash between the justice ministry and the presidency.

The speed of the move is deliberate. Żurek is acting before the network can organise resistance. But replacing these court leaders is not straightforward.

Żurek himself is a former judge who was targeted by PiS for defending judicial independence during its eight-year rule (2015–2023). His appointment last week signalled a more aggressive approach than that of his predecessor Adam Bodnar.

By removing them in one sweep, Żurek has effectively cut out the leadership tier of the PiS-era judicial network. It’s a direct strike at the system’s command posts.

Court presidents and vice-presidents have significant administrative powers: they control which judges are assigned to which cases, oversee internal discipline, and manage promotions. In PiS hands, this became a tool for political pressure.

Under PiS, the neoKRS was used to appoint politically loyal judges, many of them called “neo-sędziowie” (neo-judges) by critics. These judges often advanced PiS priorities and shielded allies from legal consequences.

Most of those suspended are linked to the “neoKRS” - the National Council of the Judiciary (Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa) reconstituted by PiS in 2018 in a way the EU Court of Justice later ruled unlawful.

In just two days, Żurek suspended 46 presidents and vice-presidents of Poland’s common courts. These are the senior judges who run local, regional, and provincial courts across the country.

Poland’s new justice minister Waldemar Żurek has just launched the fastest move yet to dismantle the judicial network built by the nationalist Law and Justice party (PiS) 1/ 👇

Austria's neutrality is not dead. But for the first time in a generation, it is no longer sacred. The silence that protected it for decades has broken, and it will not be easy to restore

Former chancellor Sebastian Kurz captures the contradiction: “The situation looks totally different… but I don’t see this decision [joining NATO] in Austria”

Public opinion is still firmly pro-neutrality. A 2024 Gallup poll found 74% in favour of keeping it. Only NEOS openly supports NATO entry. The ÖVP is split, SPÖ and Greens opposed, and the far-right FPÖ demands withdrawal from NATO partnership programmes

Joining NATO remains unlikely. Neutrality is locked into Austria’s constitution. Repeal would require a two-thirds parliamentary majority and probably a referendum. Defence spending is 0.8% of GDP, far below NATO’s 2% benchmark

Austria is now ringed by NATO states: Germany, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Italy. It sits 600 km from Ukraine, with two pro-Russian governments, Hungary and Slovakia, on its borders

Vienna is already aligned in practice. It joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace in 1995, contributes to NATO-led peacekeeping, and in 2023 signed Germany’s European Sky Shield Initiative. Even low-level cooperation triggers political anxiety

That logic is fraying. Russia’s war in Ukraine, Finland and Sweden joining NATO, and Austria’s quiet integration into EU defence projects have all exposed neutrality’s limits as a security guarantee

Geography made it work. Austria was a Cold War buffer, NATO to the west, the Warsaw Pact to the east. The Alps added a natural barrier. Neutrality promised survival through strategic invisibility

Neutrality was born with the 1955 Austrian State Treaty. The Allies withdrew, Austria pledged never to join a military alliance or host foreign bases. It became identity as much as policy, marked each year on 26 October as Austria’s National Day

“Neutrality alone will not protect us,” Beate Meinl-Reisinger told Die Welt on 26 July. She called for “a serious and open public debate” on Austria’s security future. She did not back NATO entry, but shattered a taboo that has held since 1955

Austria’s neutrality was untouchable for nearly 70 years. Now the foreign minister has broken the taboo. What changed, and why NATO membership is still a remote prospect